As you might be able to tell from the rather snazzy looking teaser trailer above the 3rd Edition of Infinity from Corvus Belli is coming later this year in 2014!

This is all being announced and revealed via the massive Infinity event going on at FicZone this weekend which Warren & Lloyd have both attended to get you some awesome access into this tournament scene for the game.

As well as the Infinity events going on over the weekend there are also going to be appearances from the maestro himself Angel Giraldez and Plastcraft Games who make whole swathes of awesome terrain for use in the world of Infinity.

As you read this the guys are going to be in the zone with the Infinity guys and hopefully will be bringing back some awesome discussion on where Infinity is going. It promises to be an epic event and for those of you would couldn’t make it over there we hope we can show you just how ace this is!

The main thing of course is that Infinity is getting it’s 3rd Edition this year! We want to know what you guys think about that in the comments below so get talking!

I think it’s a great opportunity for Infinity to establish itself at least to the level of a game like Malifaux. As @infiniteferic mentioned the rules could do with a little tightening, also the English language translation could be better, and pretty much all of its peers now use stat cards. A new edition is a great jumping on point for new players and might finally get my group interested enough to have a good run at it.

I don’t think stat cards are, in themselves, any good. I don’t think they’ll even work very well in infinity. Other games probably have simpler profiles, and fewer profiles/choices per troop category than Infinity. I don’t fancy having to shuffle through 10 different cards just to find one variant of a Morat Vanguard. And then I’d be shuffling through a thick bunch of other cards for all the other guys. But yeah, new edition! =D

Sorry, still can’t see cards as something even remotely probable. Changing the stats won’t be done since it would invalidate/be incompatible with several other books. Having less stats isn’t what infinity is about. Presenting the stats differently, in a more compact manner or perhaps only presenting the most important ones, is another matter. But still, the huge variety within even a single kind of troop choice is often so big that I don’t see cards as probable or, in my opinion, desirable.

Apology accepted . I didn’t mean to imply that 2nd Malifaux was a template for 3rd ed Infinity. I meant it as an example of how a new edition can accommodate changes of whatever kind. A stat card for a troop type with alternate weapon and equipment options could easily list the stats, abilities, and options on it. You could use the entire back of the card to list the options if needs be. The player would then just need to note which one is being used. A clear card sleeve and a dry wipe marker could do the job. Even a separate army list which can be referred to only to demonstrate the option chosen whilst using the card for everything else would be sufficient.

I think you’re probably right on whether the cards are probable. I don’t expect to see them in 3rd ed. Whether they’re desirable is a different matter. They may not be desirable for you, but I can tell you from first-hand experience that they are 100% desirable for some and are the demarcation point over whether the game competes for table time against WM, Malifaux, WWX, and other games which do use them. For many players, they make a skirmish game much more accessible, and consequently, they are desirable.

I don’t by any means want that. I just want the game to be more accessible so that more people play it. And given that I know for a fact that some potential players are put off by the lack of stat cards then it’s not a case of whether it will absolutely improve the game or not, it’s purely about accessibility, of which the lack of stat cards are the least of the problems so I don’t want to get hung up on that. Are Infinity players so elitist and exclusivist that they would rather the game did not address this? Do you not want the game to rival WM or Malifaux for popularity or do you get a kick out of being niche?

The relative popularity of Malifaux and Infinity must be a very regional thing, or varies a lot by country – I’ve seen maybe a dozen games of Malifaux played, ever.

With stat cards I don’t get the hate for them but I also don’t really see the attraction either.

All the list builders (which you’ll likely need to use anyway) will do printouts which list all the unit abilities and equipment that was chosen, including weapon stats. You can’t include the text for the skills and equipment on a card because they’re generally too long – in some extreme cases you’d be looking at 2-3 sides of A4 to fit all the abilities text associated with a unit.

So again, I’m not against stat cards but as they’d only have stats and a list of skill names I don’t see the benefit.

Malifaux is very successful in the US, which is the largest overall market for our industry. The UK market rivals the US market purely in terms of GW sales and is the second largest market overall. As a Spanish game, both in location and native language, Infinity is already starting at a disadvantage against Malifaux (and WM) in the big two markets. In the seminar CB did at GenCon (I think the video is on BoW somewhere) they even attributed their dramatic growth over the last few years to BoW introducing them to the English speaking market. I’ve no doubt that Infinity is bigger than Malifaux in Spain and other countries too, and it may even rival Malifaux in the UK, but overall its sales don’t match Malifaux’s. Bear in mind that Infinity has been around several years longer than Malifaux too.

It’s been mentioned elsewhere in these comments that PP made a big effort with their 2nd editions of WM and Hordes to make the rules much easier to get to grips with and its paid off for them in a big way. Since they released them in 2010, they’ve been able to rival WFB for the second most popular game in the industry, they may even have surpassed it. It’s hard to know as GW don’t break down their sales by product line. The original Malifaux rulebook was very poorly laid out and the rules were full of holes, so they released a 1.5 mini rulebook a little over a year later which addressed all the issues. Clarity of presentation is much more important than having stat cards, which seem to have become the wedge issue in these comments. I mentioned them last in the list of things I hoped that CB could address to make 3rd ed Infinity a more accessible game because I think they’re the least important thing CB need to do with Infinity. For many people their presence would be neither here nor there. There are people for whom it does make a difference though, so for that reason alone if I was CB I’d be seriously considering them. Though like I say, presentation and clarity of the rules is the real issue, stat cards are more a sideshow.

As a privately held company, Wyrd’s finances aren’t publicly available for direct comparison. From sales through US distributors, Malifaux was the fifth best selling game up until the summer quarter of 2012 behind only the big four games from GW and PP. FFG’s release of X-Wing bumped it out of the top five in the fall of 2012.

This is great news, my group tried this game and really liked the idea behind it. However the thing that most held us back from getting fully into was the rules translation, there where parts where the rules seemed vague and the translation didn’t seem to make sense. As we didn’t have a veteran player around to teach us we ended up giving up and moving on. I really hope they take this chance to address those issue because the world and the mini’s are great and the game was a lot of fun.

Yeah, having a veteran around, or a “champion” of the game certainly helps a lot. But… everything is available free on Infinity’s web site and the Infinity Wiki really clears anything you need to know up. Pretty sweet.

Corvus Belli make the rules available for free on their website so you won’t immediately need to buy a new book to be able to keep playing. It’s also not due out until later in the year so you’ll get some use out of this book too.

Well, not for another 8 months or so. There’s still hours of entertainment to be had from reading all the background, history, and lore, as well as looking at all the pictures. I’ve looked at my core rulebook for more than 30 hours, I’m sure – where can you find quality entertainment for just 1£ per hour?!?

Hmm I wonder if this means we will see a 2 player starter? Two ~125 point forces, 3rd edition book, templates, and maybe a double sided 2×2 mat (even better if it’s like the Deadzone one) and perhaps some cardstock or MDF terrain as a result of one of their many terrain partnerships (perhaps even Antenocitis).

It’s a nice thought, but it would be hard for them to price it competitively while maintaining the quality of minis they normally produce. It would end up like the Firestorm Armada box set, cool but not really any cheaper than just buying the components separately. Or it would end up like the Battletech boxed set, cool but with minis that are of a noticeably lower quality than what you would usually buy.

Actually, if you mean the 2-player Valhalla box, you pay the same as you’d pay for 2 patrol fleets. Which means you get for 2 pounds more- a hardbound rulebook (20pounds price), a bunch of dice and a rather large space station and some cardboard asteroids. Even if you assume the space station is equivalent to 3 dindrenzi frigates that you’re missing compared to a patrol fleet set, it still means you pay 2 pounds for a 20 pound rulebook. plus of course the set has unique battleships so far unavalible elsewhere which might ot might not count towards “better value”. Either way, if you are just starting and want both fleets in the set, it does offer a significan saving over buying the rules and models separately.

As for this, I’m interested to see where they take the rules in 3rd ed. The minis were already taken to regions I dont care about so I doubt it’ll bring me back, but you never know.

Hi redden. I wanted to edit my post and add a smiley face, but couldn’t. I just happen to be starting out just when a change is announced. But from what I gather on the forum that this will be more of a update than a major change like other company’s. Except of course the use of 55mm bases, which seems to have caused quite a stir on the forum.

I am very excited for this edition because I do think it will jump infinity into mainstream. I know a lot of folks have asked for rules clarification (I don’t really get why) and hopefully hey hired a smart translated to help them capture the Anglo market. Great news CB!

I’m excited and a little wary. Will this be a rules revamp or mostly an advancement of the storyline? I wouldn’t like to see new rules for new rules sake, like we see with another well-known company. And although I’ve bought the books a while ago I haven’t yet played the value out of them. IN fact I haven’t played from the campaign book at all.

I can’t speak to the writing in the original language, but the English translations are damn near incomprehensible. But even if the translation were better, the existing rulebooks are very poorly organized. I really hope they do better this time around.

Infinity is a great game but has always lacked polish. Too many rough spots. Too much FAQ. A few completely absurd moments.I never bought the rulebooks, just used the free PDFs and the user-edited rulebook so I’ve missed out on all the fluff. I will gladly pick this one up when it comes out.

For those talking about the current rulebooks and perhaps a bit upset about them being replaced, I think it is worth remembering that as all the rules to play the game, excluding the mission system from Paradiso I think, are available entirely for free and always have been, the value of those books is not in the rules, but in the fluff, that is the exclusive bit.

Personally, I plan on downloading 3rd edition rules to start with and playing it that way,unless they offer some uber cool mini with pre orders like they have in the past that tempts me, happy with the fluff from the 3 books I have.

Mrchom why would then need to have a rile to stop ramboing? It would take something away from the game if the put and order limit on what each model could use and also mess with the balane .

The anti rambo element in infinity is the ITS missions. When things are objective based just ramboing your most powerful unit into killing a load of guys will not win you the game. And if you have missions where certain troops have to do a task having a low order limit would really hurt armies with no access to cheap and therefore lots of specialist troops.

And 4 orders is not ramboing in my book. What if my doc needs to get to someone 16″ away. That’s 3 orders already.

Well, other systems encourage you to keep your doc up with the troops and not leave them behind until they’re needed. In fact, in other systems you can move all your troopers (you know, models you paid money for) every turn and not be penalized for it. I dig a lot about the infinity ruleset, but the unlimited order cap per model is, to me at least, a serious flaw. Obviously they will not change it because fans love it though.

What has paying for models have anything to do with it? Do you have some urge to always move a payed for model X amount of times per round in the games you play? And why would it automatically be bad to move several models a few times rather than spending all your orders on only one? Ramboing only works against inexperienced players in their first few games, and even then only primaraly if they deployed very poorly. Once you have the experience from a handful of games, ramboing won’t be very beneficial any more.

Paying for a model has a lot to do with it. Due to the way the order pool works, the basic LI is essentially little more than a token that stands there at the back of the table hoping to not get shot as the HI and specialists do the job more often than not. And while in other games you can take chances and move the cheap unit to maybe rush enemy, in this game they’re to be coddled because if you lose one, you lose an order from the pool. It leads, in my experience, to very repetitve and extremely conservative gameplay- chances are something you desperately try not to take in case you lose the precious order from the pool. It’s gamey, unrealistic and frankly, disappointing. As I said, I’m aware my opinion is in the minority as most people love the system.

You and I play the game very differently it seems. I think it’s a very poor plan to hide you LT in the back somewhere, if you do that often it will just tell your opponent what model you LT is. Hanging back, mostly alone I presume since it would be really bad to leave models babysitting the LT (thus rendering them also totally worthless) and a lone model without protections, which you have clearly signalled is you LT invited disaster. I’ve never played like you described that you play yourself and I’ve never had your problem. Try being more active with you LT and keep the opponent guessing who it might be instead of clearly telling him.

I started out with Neoterrans and it sometimes felt the same with a gap in power between my cheap line troops and expensive my heavy infantry. With most of my force starting in my deployment zone, ramboing with the heavy infantry felt the fastest way to try to get anything done.

I eventually switched over to playing with Nomads, Ariadna, and Haqqislam instead. Now my forces are able to be mostly comprised of 20-30pt medium infantry and skirmishers able to easily spread out and each carry a decent portion of the load when and where needed. Felt much happier since then.

I think the game picks up when you try not to put all your eggs in one basket. Now whenever someone tries ramboing against me, it’s a game of showing all the different ways my whole team can kill that one threatening unit, no matter how strong it might have seemed.

Gorgeous models (pretty hard to assemble though) but too much small rules, special weapon rules, special abilities, too much rulings have been built over a pretty simple basic game mechanic. Looking forward to see if its the direction they’ll take. That might have me again interested in this game.

I think you’d lose the character of the game if you trimmed it too much. It’s like Battletech fans, we want six volumes of rules that cover every possible eventuality and force us to use spreadsheets to track our campaigns. Infinity is about high tech warfare with hackers, drones, jetpacks and kamikaze robots. Just hackers alone adds many layers of complication when almost all the weaponry is computerized.

But that’s what we want (well, not you, but that’s fine, different strokes for different folks). We want a ruleset that allows our scifi cyberpunk fantasies to be lived out, not trimmed down. I’m all for a rules reorganization and rewrite. God knows the existing rules are so terribly written and poorly organized that they need it. But I hope it doesn’t get oversimplified.